^^ Do I really need to go into why most (but not all) of your examples are laughable, or can we just agree your post is silly?

You didn't bother to put anything in your response. No doubt because you know you're wrong now and you can't demonstrate any grasp of the current technology, pricing and usage trends in the market.

I don't think you live in my reality. Do you know people who use Photoshop at home? Visual Studio? Gaming laptops? Two monitors? They're the outliers. You think Microsoft created Surface because they think PCs can't be replaced?

Tell me what planet you live on. Show me the demographics. My planet's PC are getting used for playing games and music, youtube, email and facebook at home. So are tablets, only tablets are better at those things.

I get all that, and agree that tablets have a strong place in the market. However, there is one simple thing that prevents tablets from completely replacing a desktop/laptop in the home and at work: data entry, and any other typing-oriented task. Touchscreens are terrible compared to a dedicated keyboard for writing long-form essays, filling in data entry forms, taking notes, etc.

This is a task ill-suited the all mainstream tablets these days, and it's one virtually everyone has to do at some point in time. Microsoft might possibly be pointing the way with Surface, or perhaps handwriting recognition becomes the interface of the future. Or maybe voice dictation. But for now, nothing comes even close to a keyboard, and everyone needs input often enough to make people still need something more than a tablet. (for now)

You act as if Apple didn't release the iPad with keyboard support in 2010. I got a BT keyboard thinking I would need it. What I discovered was that I could type sufficiently fast that it was easier to skip it.

You act as if Apple didn't release the iPad with keyboard support in 2010. I got a BT keyboard thinking I would need it. What I discovered was that I could type sufficiently fast that it was easier to skip it.

For those who can't, however, they keyboard exists for data entry.

I just can't see an office worker peering into a 10 inch screen with a keyboard attached. It's just too small!

Monitor sizes have increased over the years. I remember nearly two decades ago using a 14 inch CRT screen; I've never used a desktop screen that was 10 inches or less.Bigger screens have gotten folks used to showing more information so that all the info about the customer on the phone is quickly available. Tablets are just too fiddly for most office work. Although they would have their place for salesmen and stock control as well as note taking.

Once you get those tablets up to 14 inches+, then bang goes the mobility factor. In fact, tablets seem to be actually shrinking if current trends are anything to go by.

You act as if Apple didn't release the iPad with keyboard support in 2010. I got a BT keyboard thinking I would need it. What I discovered was that I could type sufficiently fast that it was easier to skip it.

For those who can't, however, they keyboard exists for data entry.

I'm not saying it isn't there, but how many people actually have one and use it? I couldn't find hard numbers online, but I did stumble across a few online polls (unscientific, but better than nothing) that indicated physical keyboard users on the iPad are a small minority. Simply put, people are not using the iPad as their primary data input device. It's still largely a consumption machine.

I am curious how Apple would react to seeing Windows 8 tablets with keyboards strongly competing this year. Would Apple release an iPad more physically formatted for a keyboard (again)? Would they risk destroying their Macbook halo by making the iPad more data-entry friendly? Apple obviously realizes the iPad isn't a prime data entry device, which is one of the reasons why the Air exists.

Apple has always stated that it saw the iPad as an additional computer in a household, not a replacement for one.

You act as if Apple didn't release the iPad with keyboard support in 2010. I got a BT keyboard thinking I would need it. What I discovered was that I could type sufficiently fast that it was easier to skip it.

For those who can't, however, they keyboard exists for data entry.

I just can't see an office worker peering into a 10 inch screen with a keyboard attached. It's just too small!

Monitor sizes have increased over the years. I remember nearly two decades ago using a 14 inch CRT screen; I've never used a desktop screen that was 10 inches or less.Bigger screens have gotten folks used to showing more information so that all the info about the customer on the phone is quickly available. Tablets are just too fiddly for most office work. Although they would have their place for salesmen and stock control as well as note taking.

Once you get those tablets up to 14 inches+, then bang goes the mobility factor. In fact, tablets seem to be actually shrinking if current trends are anything to go by.

Again, you're behind the times. I've been using my iPad, now iPhone, hooked up to a 720p display. You're not stuck and haven't been stuck at 10" for years now.

Again, you're behind the times. I've been using my iPad, now iPhone, hooked up to a 720p display. You're not stuck and haven't been stuck at 10" for years now.

And how do you interact with that display? You have to use the iPad's screen.

Look, I'm the one who suggested that for most consumer cases, a tablet can come close to replacing a PC, so MS expecting the world will continue on as normal with $200 OS licenses is just delusional IMO.

Equally delusional however, is to believe that any significant portion of users will be using their tablets hooked up to large displays for anything other than video and the occasional game (and current Airplay has way too much lag to make the latter really workable). Data entry and comparison is still the main functionality of PC's in business, and you need an interface tailored to the display it's on. What makes the iPad such a great tablet is why it would suck ass in such a scenario.

No one is saying a tablet is all you need so shut up on that topic. The conversation is about how the iPad isn't restricted in use cases.

Do you have solomonrex on ignore or something?

The conversation is about people trying to convince themselves that tablets are good at tasks they actually are terrible at. I don't know why, dislike of Microsoft, fanboys of other companies seems to be the main reasons.

You'd think after all this time on the BF that you'd figure out that you are the outlier OrangeCream, people don't like putting up with gimped OS's with shitty interfaces, tiny screens and ridiculous workarounds to do something you can do with ease on a PC.

No one is saying a tablet is all you need so shut up on that topic. The conversation is about how the iPad isn't restricted in use cases.

Do you have solomonrex on ignore or something?

The conversation is about people trying to convince themselves that tablets are good at tasks they actually are terrible at. I don't know why, dislike of Microsoft, fanboys of other companies seems to be the main reasons.

You'd think after all this time on the BF that you'd figure out that you are the outlier OrangeCream, people don't like putting up with gimped OS's with shitty interfaces, tiny screens and ridiculous workarounds to do something you can do with ease on a PC.

Doesn't everyone have solomonrex on ignore?

Actually, I don't, but I don't really like his posts. I apologize if I'm continuing one of his details.

Seriously though, an iPad is not shitty at typing, no more than a 10" netbook. If a person needs a real keyboard or a larger display, then hook one up. This advice holds as much truth for PCs as iPads.

I just can't see an office worker peering into a 10 inch screen with a keyboard attached. It's just too small!

The original Macs had a 9" screen, yet they were the most popular computers in my college's computer lab.

Uh...yeah. The world expects more these days as compared to 30 years ago, go figure.

But hell, release an AIO with a 10" screen, and see how you'll do. You'll corner the market!

Oh, all right, then, how about the 11' MacBook Air? Or the 10-11" netbook that my law firm's managing partner travelled with a couple of years ago (before he replaced it with an iPad)? Point is, people can and do perform real office work on devices with screens about the size of an iPad's.

Point is, people can and do perform real office work on devices with screens about the size of an iPad's.

Can and do -- sure, yes.

But it's not good for the body.

You aren't designed as a human being to hunch over forwards at a severe angle for several hours a day. It's killer on the neck, shoulders and upper back. For kids and young adults it can even lead to the spine growing crooked.

Squinting at tiny text isn't good for the eyes, either. When you have a small screen, you can only fit a certain amount of text on it at before you have to either be closer to the screen to read the small text, or you have to increase the text size. The former is straight-up bad for the eyes; the latter requires more manual interaction to scroll. Again, this is not good for the body.

Point is, people can and do perform real office work on devices with screens about the size of an iPad's.

Can and do -- sure, yes.

But it's not good for the body.

You aren't designed as a human being to hunch over forwards at a severe angle for several hours a day. It's killer on the neck, shoulders and upper back. For kids and young adults it can even lead to the spine growing crooked.

Squinting at tiny text isn't good for the eyes, either. When you have a small screen, you can only fit a certain amount of text on it at before you have to either be closer to the screen to read the small text, or you have to increase the text size. The former is straight-up bad for the eyes; the latter requires more manual interaction to scroll. Again, this is not good for the body.

Funny you should mention that. I actually find that my iPad is much easier on my sorry, aging eyes (no doubt prematurely enfeebled from years of staring at desktop CRTs) than my 13" MacBook Air, because it's so effortless to zoom the text on an iPad.

Seriously though, an iPad is not shitty at typing, no more than a 10" netbook. If a person needs a real keyboard or a larger display, then hook one up. This advice holds as much truth for PCs as iPads.

I don't think comparing an iPad to netbooks, which everyone hated, is really praising the iPads typing ability. It's terrible at typing, it has a bad software keyboard, and like other touch interfaces, it's terrible at editing.

Like the one I have? Great for portability. For real work, you plug it into an external display.

Define "real work." Like I said earlier, our managing partner was running a law firm, reviewing and editing briefs, and corresponding with clients and other attorneys via a netbook whose screen compares unfavorably to an 11" MacBook Air.

Anecdotes about people abusing their bodies isn't really going to cut it.

It's not like ergonomics was invented yesterday and for no reason.

Older people do need larger screens. How you sit at your desk is important. Eventually, bad posture and bad lighting catch up with you.

I certainly learned at various times and places that it mattered to me. I injured my back as a young man and suddenly, all kinds of things that my formerly semi-perfect body could "get away with" became real problems at work.

I've had to fuss over chairs, screen sizes, and much else. Recently, I had to adopt Microsoft keyboards at home and at work (giving up my beloved IBM keyboards that I thought I was going to be buried with) because of problems with how my wrists flex. That one took a long time to show up, but show up it did.

It's way early days with tablets. If they really do catch on in the workplace as mainline workstations, we're virtually certain to find many ergonomic problems with them. We just don't know what all of them are yet. The too-small monitor is one, though. Anyone who stoops over theirs is going to learn before they are too much older to find another way.

Right now, we're in the "new shiny" phase where it can do no wrong and the problems are largely unknown and in the future. But, expect that to change.

An angled keyboard and a large 17"-24" display will solve the ergonomic problems if tablets are adopted for whatever reason

No doubt, but then it becomes so much like a PC, the question arises: Why bother?

I think the challenges of making a table ergonomically successful on its own terms is the serious challenge. If you turn a tablet into a PC, you kind of undercut its rationale.

Even here, I don't know that I want a tablet if I have to look down, stab with my finger, look up a the big display, look down, stab with my finger. Doesn't really work.

It reminds me of all those threads that told us we were going to plug our phones into docks and do the same thing. That one hasn't really worked out, at least not in the first world and I doubt it does elsewhere, either.

Right now, this discussion reveals a hidden issue; the thing is very much a consumption / entertainment device. It just isn't really optimized for heads down work. Making it so, now that would be something.

Again, you're behind the times. I've been using my iPad, now iPhone, hooked up to a 720p display. You're not stuck and haven't been stuck at 10" for years now.

And how do you interact with that display? You have to use the iPad's screen.

Look, I'm the one who suggested that for most consumer cases, a tablet can come close to replacing a PC, so MS expecting the world will continue on as normal with $200 OS licenses is just delusional IMO.

Equally delusional however, is to believe that any significant portion of users will be using their tablets hooked up to large displays for anything other than video and the occasional game (and current Airplay has way too much lag to make the latter really workable). Data entry and comparison is still the main functionality of PC's in business, and you need an interface tailored to the display it's on. What makes the iPad such a great tablet is why it would suck ass in such a scenario.

Quote:

It's like complaining about a 13" CRT running XP.

No, it's not like that at all.

Actually a (horizontal) touchscreen on a desk alongside a mouse and keyboard can be a great way to augment interaction on a desktop PC (with a vertical monitor), there is academic HCI research supporting this.

An angled keyboard and a large 17"-24" display will solve the ergonomic problems if tablets are adopted for whatever reason.

..and again, what interface will be run on them?? You need to abstract the touch interface at that point, or else you have the same problem - hunching down to work on the tablet or extending your arm to manipulate the monitor directly if it has touch capabilities. In the former your vision will constantly be oscillating between the touch screen and the primary large screen monitor, in the form its gorilla arm, which MS still doesn't seem to fucking get.

So you need an interface which doesn't require you to constantly switch between the two. We have it. It's called a mouse/trackpad, and we have interfaces suited to the expansive real estate you get with an abstracted display and far better acclimated to the finer control you get with such physical interfaces. You're arguing for the reinvention of something that exists, because...fuck, I have no idea.

Define "real work." Like I said earlier, our managing partner was running a law firm, reviewing and editing briefs, and corresponding with clients and other attorneys via a netbook whose screen compares unfavorably to an 11" MacBook Air.

I'm sure there are anecdotes about people successfully using their Windows XP tablet in a work environment too. But hey, keep using one from a platform that was widely derided and has been cancelled by every major OEM as a viable market to support your argument.

Actually a (horizontal) touchscreen on a desk alongside a mouse and keyboard can be a great way to augment interaction on a desktop PC (with a vertical monitor), there is academic HCI research supporting this.

Note...augment. Not serve as the primary and only interface, as that would be bloody insane.

Like the one I have? Great for portability. For real work, you plug it into an external display.

Define "real work." Like I said earlier, our managing partner was running a law firm, reviewing and editing briefs, and corresponding with clients and other attorneys via a netbook whose screen compares unfavorably to an 11" MacBook Air.

The "real work" argument is the worst fucking argument for any fucking device on the planet. Real work is what you do regardless of your fucking device. You can do "real work" on a fucking vibrator if that's your job.

Like the one I have? Great for portability. For real work, you plug it into an external display.

Define "real work." Like I said earlier, our managing partner was running a law firm, reviewing and editing briefs, and corresponding with clients and other attorneys via a netbook whose screen compares unfavorably to an 11" MacBook Air.

The "real work" argument is the worst fucking argument for any fucking device on the planet. Real work is what you do regardless of your fucking device. You can do "real work" on a fucking vibrator if that's your job.

I'd say one of the worst fucking arguments is arguing the applicable productivity of a class of a device that was universally panned and completely failed in the marketplace after only a few short years, but that's me.

Actually, the worst argument is using outlier personal anecdotes ("Hey, my boss used an Osborne with a 4" screens, so tablets should be fine!") - to argue against what should be observable reality; that being the vast, vast majority of the working world uses m&k interfaces hooked up to large monitors to perform data manipulation and comparison - which really, is at the heart of so much business use cases for PC's.

Are there people making videos and editing movies, writing documents and working with Numbers on iPads? Sure. Is it such a plurality that it is having an impact in the office whereby it's replacing the PC as the primary utility device for a good percentage of the workforce, or a threat to? Give me a break. It may be able to, but as has been pointed out (but shouldn't have been necessary), once you include a much larger, detached viewing area, you reduce the utility of the touch interface on the tablet significantly. So if it does, it will resemble something quite different than the tablets of today. Maybe MS's vision will pay off - albeit I'm not holding much hope at this point, as I have severe problems with their execution.

Now, as for the home user, a tablet might actually be able to be used primarily as the consumption vs. creation ratio is reversed as compared to office work. A student will likely still need access to a PC, but it's utility will be significantly reduced to the point where one serving the needs that only a PC can do could be had for under $300, or they should stretch out their aging shitbox longer and longer. So this is why I think MS pricing Win8 back to 'normal' is dangerous (no one has mentioned BTW that many homes have more than one PC - are they all going to go out and get new Win8 PC's at the same time?), but I'm not willing to go full-hog and believe because the tablet is a threat to traditional PC's in the home that means it's ready to be used in the accounting dept as the only computing device.

I was complaining about the real work argument. Whenever you (general "you") bring up the phrase "real work", you deserve to be punched. Your real work is not my real work and is not someone else's real work.

Otherwise, I agree that Microsoft is wrong for upping the price. I agree that personal anecdotes are not good data points, but they're the data points we have. We're geeks arguing on a message board, not execs.

I was complaining about the real work argument. Whenever you (general "you") bring up the phrase "real work", you deserve to be punched. Your real work is not my real work and is not someone else's real work.

Otherwise, I agree that Microsoft is wrong for upping the price. I agree that personal anecdotes are not good data points, but they're the data points we have. We're geeks arguing on a message board, not execs.

This is exactly right, and is what I've more clumsily been attempting to argue. Folks consistently say, "you can't do real work on a tablet," when it simply isn't true. As has been pointed out ad nauseum, there are all kinds of "real work" that can be done on a tablet. Then, when confronted with examples of such real work, the response is something along the lines of "that's not real work" or, my favorite, ZZ's contention that just because someone is torturing themselves to do real work on the device doesn't mean that they should. Well, when someone who could choose any device he wants is running a damned law firm from a tablet, that suggests that they are, indeed, capable of many kinds of "real work," even if it's not the kind of work or device that you would choose.

Otherwise, I agree that Microsoft is wrong for upping the price. I agree that personal anecdotes are not good data points, but they're the data points we have. We're geeks arguing on a message board, not execs.

...but many of us also work in offices, and we can also look at sales figures to the enterprise and use cases, so it's not completely anecdotal. The press loves novelty, and an entire business switching a good portion of their personnel that previous relied on PC's for much of their work to tablets would have made headlines by now.

But you're right, "Real Work" is likely too derogatory a term for people who are actually producing content on their tablets - there are artists, film editors and writers producing content on these devices to a level which is certainly beyond what I can likely do on a traditional PC. So I don't know what term we could use outside of just "office work" or "data manipulation", as like it or not that boring crap is what most PC's in business are used for.

Then, when confronted with examples of such real work, the response is something along the lines of "that's not real work" or, my favorite, ZZ's contention that just because someone is torturing themselves to do real work on the device doesn't mean that they should. Well, when someone who could choose any device he wants is running a damned law firm from a tablet, that suggests that they are, indeed, capable of many kinds of "real work," even if it's not the kind of work or device that you would choose.

...or the majority would choose, and for good reason. Christ, it's a matter of the human skeletal structure for fucks sake, I really could care less what your one anecdotal argument says - if it actually says anything. What does "running" mean in this instance? He's writing all legal briefs? His entire staff uses tablets?*

Is your contention that if you keep repeating the singular anecdote it will establish some form of data?

At my former job, our lead developer brought an iPad to meetings instead of his notebook. And...? I hooked up notebook up to the projector and ran the meeting. His iPad was in "use" - to check his email, and slowly look up things on our Intranet during discussions. So yes, he was "using" it - but only because it was supplemented by other people actually doing the work on traditional PC's in the room.

*Edit - We're jumping back and forth here, you're likely referring to your example of the lawyer using a netbook, not a tablet. Again though, how in the hell does this support your argument? It supports mine perfectly in that singular anecdotal stories are pointless, and it's not possible to more perfectly illustrate this than in your own argument. If a 10" netbook with a cramped keyboard was a viable option for primary work, then why in the fucking hell did the market completely tank, they received horrible reviews, and now no OEM makes them?

All it says is that your lawyer friend has odd working habits or it just not that demanding of his/her PC's for work. The rest of the business world disagrees, and this isn't a hypothesis - it's a fact. The netbook market is gone, because once 13" full-sized laptops got close to the netbook price points, people chose them instead.

Then, when confronted with examples of such real work, the response is something along the lines of "that's not real work" or, my favorite, ZZ's contention that just because someone is torturing themselves to do real work on the device doesn't mean that they should. Well, when someone who could choose any device he wants is running a damned law firm from a tablet, that suggests that they are, indeed, capable of many kinds of "real work," even if it's not the kind of work or device that you would choose.

...or the majority would choose, and for good reason. Christ, it's a matter of the human skeletal structure for fucks sake, I really could care less what your one anecdotal argument says - if it actually says anything. What does "running" mean in this instance? He's writing all legal briefs? His entire staff uses tablets?

Is your contention that if you keep repeating the singular anecdote it will establish some form of data?

"Running" means staying in touch with clients and other attorneys via e-mail, reviewing and revising briefs, taking meeting notes, managing his calendar, you know, real work. No, the entire staff doesn't use tablets; for example, I use a tablet, a desktop, or a laptop depending on the circumstances. (When on the road and writing briefs on the laptop, incidentally, the tablet is very useful as a second screen for legal research.)

My anecdote is a single data point that is sufficient to establish that people, human skeletal structure and all, are capable of, and sometimes choose, to do real work using a tablet, and that they are not merely "consumption devices." [Digression--I really hate that phrase, as though consumption were something to be ashamed of. If it is, why aren't we sneering at our TV sets?] When people say you "can't" do something, then one data point to the contrary is sufficient to disprove the argument. I'm asserting nothing about what "the majority" might choose, but simply that tablets can be, and are being, used for what anyone would include in their definition of real work.

At my former job, our lead developer brought an iPad to meetings instead of his notebook. And...? I hooked up notebook up to the projector and ran the meeting. His iPad was in "use" - to check his email, and slowly look up things on our Intranet during discussions. So yes, he was "using" it - but only because it was supplemented by other people actually doing the work on traditional PC's in the room.

*Edit - We're jumping back and forth here, you're likely referring to your example of the lawyer using a netbook, not a tablet. Again though, how in the hell does this support your argument? It supports mine perfectly in that singular anecdotal stories are pointless, and it's not possible to more perfectly illustrate this than in your own argument. If a 10" netbook with a cramped keyboard was a viable option for primary work, then why in the fucking hell did the market completely tank, they received horrible reviews, and now no OEM makes them?

All it says is that your lawyer friend has odd working habits or it just not that demanding of his/her PC's for work. The rest of the business world disagrees, and this isn't a hypothesis - it's a fact. The netbook market is gone, because once 13" full-sized laptops got close to the netbook price points, people chose them instead.

To address your edit, I should clarify what I briefly noted above--my "lawyer friend" (actually, my boss) previously used a netbook, but replaced it with an iPad. And I think the reason the netbook market tanked is because folks have been replacing netbooks not with 13" laptops, but with iPads. Note that the tablet (primarily iPad) market has been booming as netbook sales crash, while PC sales have been slumping, and ultrabooks (with the exception of the Air) do not appear to have taken off. Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude that it is iPads, not 13" laptops, that destroyed the netbook market.

To address your edit, I should clarify what I briefly noted above--my "lawyer friend" (actually, my boss) previously used a netbook, but replaced it with an iPad. And I think the reason the netbook market tanked is because folks have been replacing netbooks not with 13" laptops, but with iPads. Note that the tablet (primarily iPad) market has been booming as netbook sales crash, while PC sales have been slumping, and ultrabooks (with the exception of the Air) do not appear to have taken off. Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude that it is iPads, not 13" laptops, that destroyed the netbook market.

They certainly had a massive impact, but just like tablets, that points to netbooks not replacing PC's as the primary form of computing, rather than supplementing them - as they did for me. It was a nice machine to tote along because it was cheap and small and I could use it for light work in places, but christ when I had to knuckle down and be truly productive, I'm sure as hell glad it wasn't my only one.